Friday, June 09, 2006

Wally Man Show 2

Wally Man has every speech impediment.

He hates 'pethth' (pests).

Here's a good reason.

Here are some teasers for you:

The Tortoise and the Mammal

Billy Chicken gets the idea that he could win a lot of money by staging a race and dressing up Sammy Beast in a Tortoise suit to race against Wally the higher invertebrate.He tells Sammy to be sure to lose the race.

He figures Tortoises always win so everyone will bet on the tortoise, so Billy bets on Wally. The odds against Wally are 136 to one so Billy figures he’ll clean up.Sammy Tortoise cheats to lose.

Wally is so stupid though that he loses the race anyway and the ugly mob of animals that Billy bet against chase him at the end of the cartoon.

Wally is left dumbfounded.

Aladdin’s Lump

Billy Chicken discovers a fleshy protuberance sticking out of the ground and rubs it, thinking that he will summon a magic genie to grant his chicken wishes.No genie appears but the lump does get shiny which seems promising. He tries wishing upon a shine, but still nothing happens so he gets mad and hits the lump.A bump appears on the lump and this time he knows he’s on to something.He rubs the lump and sure enough out pops the enchanted Genie of the Lump.

In the end it turns out that the shiny fleshy lump is the top of Wally’s bald head. He has been buried in dirt for a week.Everyone laughs as Wally chases Billy and the genie, sputtering dirt out of his impedimented lips.

The Thicken Pwot Thickens (The chicken plot thickens)

Billy and Sammy are cheap thugs that are looting the forest. It is a dark underworld film noir forest.They are stealing sap from Maple trees, and striking terror throughout the animal kingdom.Officer Wally Man of the undercover squad tracks them to bring them to justice.A hard-boiled thriller.

Nathunal Geogwaphic Thtowieth

Wally is watching his favorite show-National Geographic.He loves to watch nature shows about animals in the wild.All of a sudden his reception goes haywire.He goes outside to see what happened and finds wild animals chewing his cable lines and he goes crazy!Wally tries to rid himself of his pests so he can go back to watching the wonders of nature safe inside his man-made environment.

Why don't you ever make Flash shorts on your own? I'm sure you could do it.

Oh yes: I showed this post and the last Wally Man post to my little sister. I showed her the 'Fustwated' drawing first. She stared at it for a few seconds, and then burst out laughing, and then laughed even harder when she read 'Wally Man has every speech impediment.' I'm sure there was an 'Awww' in there too. She loved that fact that Wally Man paints the one bowtie he's allowed to have. She said: 'Aww he's so cute!...' [then her tone went completely serious] '... and weird.' (she said that in a good way, though!) She thought this little fella was really cute, and his name seemed to be the icing on the cake for her!

I have limited knowledge of expressions, gestures and complex social situations.

Get out and meet people, or atleast observe them. There's no better way to do it than that.

I also have some questions about this Wally Man character. As others have said already, he has a nice design. But, I still don't know enough about him to truly say if he could be an entertaining character or not. What exactly is his personality? For instance: if a mouse walked into the room would Wally scream like a girl or rip it apart with his teeth? Or would he befriend the mouse? That chicken is labelled 'evil'. Is he an antagonist for Wally? Or are they partners in evil?Giving Wally all those speech impediments kind of indicates that he could have a low self-esteem, but I see no definite proof of that.

Sorry to be a little turd, but I have to know all this and more about Wally or else I'll just have to keep a tepid opinion of this one.

Great execution of one of your less impressive cartoon ideas. The characters are drawn well, but they’re not very appealing designs like Ren, Stimpy, or even the Ripping Friends. No offensive, but I don’t think anyone would buy this concept. Even He-Hog was a better idea than this.

My theory about Wally Man is that he personifies the human condition. In the way that cartoon ducks are insanely over-the-top caricatures of what ducks are like, Wally Man is an insanely over-the-top caricature of what people are like. That's why he's all fleshy, and gross, and hairy (in the tight close-ups), and annoying, and disturbing, yet cute, and sweet, and sympathetic ... Like mankind in gereral, he's mainly awful, but in a hilarious way.

Since he's got all the cartoony physical properties, I expect his emotional make-up to be equally pushed to the extreme. He must be an emotional wreck, with every kind of baggage, like deep-seated jealousy and horrible self-esteem. I think, like any real man, he should also struggle with his terrible war-like tendencies. And he should be constanltly love-sick, and always suffering.

Hey, John, while you're at it, why don't you draw a character with a ball for a body, no arms, two simple feet, no toes, no hair, no ears, no mouth, two little dots for eyes, and a big ball-shaped nose?

I share the opinion in the sense that many details of the personality of this new character: Wally. It is an excellent drawing, is certain. I believe that several we agree….Also the hen, but I think honestly that John K. must surprise with Wally'stories… is necessary to wait for… While, is good this! FP,Chile

Although I do not know much about Wally Man, I certainly enjoy his adventures and exploits so far. As a representative of the zoologist (entomologist) community, I give an emphatic two-thumbs up to 'Nathunal Geogwaphic Thtowieth.' Spumco has always made a concerted effort to represent true animal biodiversity.

Unlike other people who have responded to this post, I am not as deeply concerned about the personality (ambiguity) of the character. This show could serve as a means to display bizarre humor that would seem out of place with other Spumco characters. Wally Man's personality could be reactionary...his environment acts in a strange manner and he responds in an equally (but appropriate) unusual manner.

The entire concept of Wally is in a way poking fun classic cartoon characters and how they're named after their own species, Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Woody Woodpecker, etc, and of course the big human ears placed at the very top of his head is probably a shot at Mickey. I'm stating the obvious here though, but that's what makes the character instantly funny. He has a lot of problems it seems. Billy Chicken is an instigator, Wally seems like the easiest target to take advantage of, but it always backfires. Billy gets more and more frustrated as his plots against Wally become more well-thought out and intricate, but fail more spectacularly than the last plan. Wally of course is oblivious. This pisses Billy off even more.

Wally has generic aspects of human personality. What does Bugs and every other rabbit love? Carrots. What do humans concern themselves with more than most other animals. Petht. The pests get the best of Wally, probably more in a Bugs or Daffy way, they do it deliberately for laughs. Wally always gets the best of Billy, but in this case it's different because Wally doesn't do it on purpose. There's a higher power punishing Billy for his wrong-doings. The animator. I loved that about classic cartoons. The animators weren't physically in the cartoons, but they were still there, telling you jokes. When something goes ary for no logical reason, that's the animator, not the characters delivering jokes. I don't see that a lot these days. Kinda makes the cartoons impersonal because you can't connect with the people behind the scenes.

I'm looking forward to this if it gets picked up. Seems like a really good kid's show. I only suggest you keep these short and sweet. Wouldn't work as a 22 minute long sitcom.

...if the chicken (secretly) bets on Wally to win, and expects him to win, and thereby clean up when all the other animals bet on the Beast/tortoise to WIN, then the tortoise LOSES--why does the mob of ugly angry animals chase the chicken at the end? He LOST?

john, you around? I asked earlier but never saw a response and hate to bug ya but did you work with bakshi on new adventures of mighty mouse and have you an idea if they will ever see the day of light on dvd? An ever loyal fan p.s. stop by some time I make some killer italian food if you're up to it.I'm sure a trip to minnesota wouldn't outta the way for ya huh?haha

Maybe he has to use one of those cartoon portable holes. Whenever he needs to unload, he just slaps one of those babies on. Then when he's done crapping, he peals off the holes and sells them at the flea markets. Then people buy the used holes from the flea markets, thinking that they are hats. The used crap-holes are then worn by the people as hats, and the holes swallow all of their inteligence and concept of culture from their worn feeble minds. So then the people become completely retarded and have no choice but to become TV executives.

Speaking off speech impediments, I would like to say that I love the way Ralph Bakshi talked in the Ren & Stimpy cartoon "Fire Dogs 2" (a true classic!). My favorite lines in that episode are the following.

Every time I look at that first drawing of Wally I laugh my ass off! I would love to see a show like this get picked up. The drawings shown here would totally lend themselves to a T.V. budget.

I always wonder why it is that some people are so eager to assume that one of Johns ideas somehow won't work? Especially based on so little information. Perhaps someday everyone will finally learn that it is the Artist "skill" that determins the success of a project, and NOT the "project". John could make a funny ass cartoon with stick figures and finger paints.

John, is there any chance of you drawing some "Uncle Eddy" style quick web comics with Wally?

I'm curious to see what people figure out just by looking at the character designs.

But slowly I am gonna put up more info-but not whole stories, or what would be the point of animating them if you already knew everything that is gonna happen?

How's the landscape painting going? Rich yet?

Your pal,

John"

Hey John!

It's funny you mention my landscape painting. People classify my painting as "Fine Art." Do you think that applies to animation that is more experimental? Fine art seems to be classified as a total freedom of expression unfettered by anything, but the pure artistic impulse. The reason I bring this up is question you pose: ”why animate a character if you know everything that’s going to happen?” I've been taught that the strongest characters are ones one knows so intimately that they feel alive, characters that one works on honing their flaws, foibles and personalities over an extended period of time. This explains the writer’s use of real characters in their lives that have been fictionalized. Before one even try to write stories about their “family,” it seems logical that if you truly know your characters wants and motivations; knowing these traits would give you a more honest way of knowing what they would do in a dramatic or comic saturation. What do you think about that? Have I been duped? I’m applying this approach with a current development deal. Am I destined for failure?

I'm not implying Wally isn't you cartoon progeny, maybe he goes really deep for you and your will peel away the layers of mystery about him like a great cartoon onion. Conversely if he is just an experiment I’m sure it will be an interesting one.

Getting back around to my earlier question do you think that experimenting with the animation form makes you a fine artist who happens to use animation, as has canvas?

>>Getting back around to my earlier question do you think that experimenting with the animation form makes you a fine artist who happens to use animation, as has canvas?<<

Nah, I'm a crass entertainer who's just always trying to figure out new pleasure buttons to press.Sometimes I press the wrong ones by always trying new things.

>>I've been taught that the strongest characters are ones one knows so intimately that they feel alive, characters that one works on honing their flaws, foibles and personalities over an extended period of time.<<

I hope I didn't teach you that!

Some of my characters are sort of real-like George Liquor, but others are just stramge fantasy beings, like Stimpy.

Bugs and Elmner are like that. Bugs is like a regular guy and Elmer could only exist in cartoons. Funny irony that the animal is more human than the human.

Cartoons are a great medium to try anything that's funny or odd. My only criteria are that they are entertaining (or at least try to be), inventive and skillfull.

>>it seems logical that if you truly know your characters wants and motivations; knowing these traits would give you a more honest way of knowing what they would do in a dramatic or comic saturation.<<

Oh, I know all my characters' traits all right. They live inside me, even the very strange ones seem completely real and motivated by their personalities. Their stories dictate themselves to me. I never have to try and figure out who there are. They tell me.

I've been taught that the strongest characters are ones one knows so intimately that they feel alive, characters that one works on honing their flaws, foibles and personalities over an extended period of time. This explains the writer’s use of real characters in their lives that have been fictionalized.Before one even try to write stories about their “family,” it seems logical that if you truly know your characters wants and motivations; knowing these traits would give you a more honest way of knowing what they would do in a dramatic or comic saturation.What do you think about that? Have I been duped? I’m applying this approach with a current development deal. Am I destined for failure?

I asked John this very same quesion several posts ago and finally got an answer thanks to Mr. Wray.I'm glad to see ou know what you're doing and that Wally Man does indeed have a personality. I thought maybe you had lost your mind for a while or something.

None, none and none. I get you, but there's a crucial element in all of the old ones you named: they're all cute and appealing to look at. Wally Man is drawn beautifully, but he's just not attractive. That isn't saying he isn't "pretty"...but like Elmer, who you also mentioned, he's a man-faced thingummy that just isn't cute, more gross. Even if the character's function in the cartoon is pure goofiness and to be a foil, like Droopyl, Droopy is "cute" enough to make people 60 years later want a drawing or a little statue of him on their desk...he serves two masters: he's funny in the cartoons and he's eye candy.

The chicken and the thumb aren't appealing like that. Ren & Stimpy were. It was their designs that made them likeable as much as their actions made them funny. If you'd desinged two funny guys to do the R&S stories they'd have tanked. I think as much as you love him(and you created him, you're entitled), George Liquor is the same deal: Joe public just can only get so much into George. I think it's why Tom & Jerry exist, and the rest of them--because animals have for 100 years been way more accessible and acceptable doing this stuff than a human design would be, even a very bizarre human design like Wally. Elmer's an exception--but again, HE never starred in his own cartoons, did he? He played against the more complex, more attractive, more appealing animals Bill Wray mentions.

>>Even if the character's function in the cartoon is pure goofiness and to be a foil, like Droopyl, Droopy is "cute" enough to make people 60 years later want a drawing or a little statue of him on their desk...he serves two masters: he's funny in the cartoons and he's eye candy<<

Good point john...Droopy, the Wolf, Tom and Jerry, Mighty Mouse...they're all flat characters...truth is, certain character types are more interesting than others, but look at the simpsons...while not the best animation...definately amazing characters and character development. and youve got all types: flat characters (Gill), stock characters (grounds keeper willie, cletus, luigi..any of the steriotipical characters), dynamic characters (lisa), static characters (Homer).

Personally i find the most interesting characters in animation to be the flawed characters. The protagonists with severe personality disorders. Think of Daffy Duck, Donald Duck, all the cartoon assholes. and in John's case, I think his best characters are Ren and George Liquor. Those extremely troubled personalitys are always the most interesting to watch.

and if wally man WERE made into a cartoon, i guarentee Billy Chicken Evil would be way more entertaining than Wally Himslef.

But again, you cant have a protagonist without the hero (Wally Man, Stimpy, Jimmy the boy idiot).

BUT, my point is, you need ALL types of characters to make a kick ass cartoon, you cant say wally man sucks cause hes too flat...screw that...wally man would be one small part in an orchestra of characters that john would throw in there.

Ren and stimpy, on their own would suck..together they bring out the best in eachother's personalities, and therefore were amazing.

you need all types of characters. No ONE type is better than another. just balance them.

I, personally, was never a big fan of Porky's or Elmer's character design. I just never found them very appealing to look at. Certain Simpsons characters, on the other hand, are REAL fun to look at. (such as Homer, Barney, Mr. Burns, Flanders, Chief Wiggum, etc.) The only problem is that they just aren't being fully animated like they should.

Talking about the Simpsons, why doesn't John help animate a spin-off of it's "cartoon within a cartoon", Itchy & Scratchy?

To me, Droopy is a deus ex machina, not a personality. When we look at certain people, we tend to think that the world lives to serve them... everything they do seems to end up winning. Droopy's purpose is to always come out on top, no matter how extreme the situation. The wolf is the character the audience is intended to identify with because he's confounded at every turn. He's the cartoon embodiment of the concept of "cruel fate". Mighty Mouse serves a similar purpose to the cats.

Now what the sheep in Mighty Mouse cartoons are meant to represent, I have no idea... Perhaps Mighty Mouse is a Christ figure to them.

There. I've taken the analysis of cartoons to the point of absurdity. That's the true purpose of discussions like this!

Anyway, it looks cool, I like weird and funny cartoons, so of course I will love this one as well, if it ever gets made.

P.S. Is everyone else as excited as I am that the original Popeye cartoons will finally all be released on DVD? Actually not only them but every popeye cartoon ever made, well I don't care about the rest, just the B&W black shirt ones and the three color musicals.

Two weeks ago I stoped by the flea market and you will not believe what I found, an old vhs tape from 1989 that had the WB Tex Avery classic "All This And Rabbit Stew". I never thought that that cartoon would ever be on vhs or DVD. That has to be one of my new favorite Bugs Bunny cartoons. I'm still trying to find a vhs tape with the cartoons "Elmers Pet Rabbit" and "Hare Ribbin". Just thought I'd mention that.

John , what are you impying? The wolf is a horny sex hound (typical male) He's an asshole and a womanizer. He's not affraid toget what he wants, like when he goes after Red.

Droopy is depressed and bored with life. He's smart, resourceful and calm.

I've never seen a Terrytoon so I'll give you Mighty Mouse.

Jerry is a sadist. He enjoys Tom's pain. Tom is different; he feels pity when he thinks he's murdered Jerry. They're both dependatn on the other. If one is is actualy mortal danger, they'll try to save one another. But Tom is definatly the one with more remorse.

>Ok, then explain Family Guy.You think Family Guy is eye candy?

> Good point john...Droopy, the Wolf, Tom and Jerry, Mighty Mouse...they're all flat characters...

No they're not...

>I, personally, was never a big fan of Porky's or Elmer's character design. I just never found them very appealing to look at. Certain Simpsons characters, on the other hand, are REAL fun to look at. (such as Homer, Barney, Mr. Burns, Flanders, Chief Wiggum, etc.) The only problem is that they just aren't being fully animated like they should.

It depends on who's drawing Porky and Elmer. Porky is really cute and has lots of appeal in Clampett's cartoons. The Black & White ones are cuter and Bob's colour ones are more wrinkly. Elmer also looked really good in this one model sheet for an Art Davis cartoon. Really cute. Rons of appeal. The Simpsons all look the same. When I was in 7th grade I frew Homer and erased his stubble, added a mustache, hair and glasses and BAM there was Ned Flanders. The Simpsons IS fully animated. The movement is extremely fluid and the animation costs mllions to prodcue. So why does it suck? Because the artists lazy assembly line workers.

>P.S. Is everyone else as excited as I am that the original Popeye cartoons will finally all be released on DVD? Actually not only them but every popeye cartoon ever made, well I don't care about the rest, just the B&W black shirt ones and the three color musicals.

YEAH, DO A POST ON POPEYE.

Also, I'd like to thank eddie for drawing my great picture to the right of me. Go to his blog!

Droopy: He'sabenevolent hero with a relentless sense of justice. That's why he was often cast as a mountie or a boy scout. He's also very cunning. Throughout some of his cartoons he seems naive and oblivious the what the wolf or Spike the bulldog is doing to him but when he seems to win by sheer luck in the end a sly smirk (or even a tiny hint at a smirk) reveals that he knew about everything all along.

Wolf: Which wolf are you talking about? The earlier lecherous doofus or the later one with the slow southern drawl? If it's the first one, I beleive I answered that already. As for the second one, he's not too bright and likes to take his time but he does possess a strong sense of duty. He considers it his job to either blow Droopy's brick house down or stop his new billy goat from eating everything or teach a classroom full of Droopy brats. No amount of setback will keep him from his duty.

Mighty Mouse: He's basically a mouse version of Superman (minus the Clark Kent-type secret identity). Take any of Superman's traits and ham them up 150% and you've got Mighty Mouse.

Tom & Jerry: Well, essentially they're both pranksters, but they're not the same type of pranksters. Jerry Mouse is much more of a counter-revolutionary prankster. Anything Tom dishes out to him, he does some calculating and then proceeds to give as good as he got. Tom, however, is only able to instigate. Whenever Jerry pulls a prank on him, he simply get flustered and starts chasing that mouse in a fit of rage. This makes him easier for Jerry to trip up (and much more fun too). Although, once Tom calms down, he too is ready to do some more calculating in order to prepare another prank on Jerry.Of course, individually their personalities don't hold much water. It is their personalities working together that makes all their cartoons work so well. That's what won them their 7 Oscars.

Like you intimated before, yes their personalities are quite bland. But they do have personalities. When the writer, director,etc. came up with those characters they (consciously or subconsciously) lay some ground rules as to what this character would or would not do. They didn't just make a funny doodle and say "run with it." That was my initial beefwith Wally Man. I had no idea what he would or would not do simply based on the drawings of him. But, adding those story synopsises certainly did help.

Hey John, i've just been looking through the archives of your blog and i find it unbelievable that it's so hard for you to get a new cartoon picked up. Don't they know that you're JOHN K. I really love the He-Hog idea and i'd love to see that get made.

I also noticed that you were trying to see how many posts you could get after you showed each idea, maybe after the Lost episodes come out you could use the sales figures to convince the fat cats that you're still popular and that people still want to see your cartoons.

If that doesn't work you could try to get things put out straight to DVD. I know that's not ideal but it works. Marvel made an animated Avengers movie that went straight to DVD and it was a success, so now they're making more.

That would probably be better for your fans that don't live in America too (like me, i'm from England) because if one of your shows did get picked up we probably wouldn't get to see it untill it came out on DVD anyway.

I know you've probably thought about all that kinda stuff allready but i just think something like He-Hog or George Liquor would be incredibly popular and the people in charge of the studios are crazy to turn this stuff down.

(Bill)>>I've been taught that the strongest characters are ones one knows so intimately that they feel alive, characters that one works on honing their flaws, foibles and personalities over an extended period of time.<<

I hope I didn't teach you that!

No that was Danny Simon. So can you espouse some theories on why he’s wrong? It seems like it works to me. Vincent seemed to go along with Danny’s theories, as he was in the class.

Some of my characters are sort of real-like George Liquor, but others are just stramge fantasy beings, like Stimpy.

When you say fantasy being like Stimpy, do you mean because he’s a talking animal or because of his personality? Wally seems like a fantasy character to me yet he looks human, where as Ren and Stimpy’s personalities were developed enough that they felt real to me. If they didn’t, I don’t think they would have been as popular.

Bugs and Elmner are like that. Bugs is like a regular guy and Elmer could only exist in cartoons. Funny irony that the animal is more human than the human.

Wait, Elmer is a Fantasy character? I thought he was just a dumb dumb. Can you elaborate your fantasy character theory? It almost sound like you mean fantasy means undeveloped or one note type personality… Is that it?

Cartoons are a great medium to try anything that's funny or odd. My only criteria are that they are entertaining (or at least try to be), inventive and skillfull.

That’s actually three or more requirements. ;-)I agree with that and add: deeply flawed, well developed characters.

>>it seems logical that if you truly know your characters wants and motivations; knowing these traits would give you a more honest way of knowing what they would do in a dramatic or comic saturation.<<

Oh, I know all my characters' traits all right. They live inside me, even the very strange ones seem completely real and motivated by their personalities. Their stories dictate themselves to me. I never have to try and figure out who there are. They tell me.

That explains a lot. You have a natural gift. I’m my case it’s more calculated. I’ve had to slowly build and re- write a character. Some times they totally change by the time I’m finished. They rarely burst out fully formed. So what does Wally tell you? Please tell us when your ready, It will help the rest of us idiots understand his appeal to you.

>>> Good point john...Droopy, the Wolf, Tom and Jerry, Mighty Mouse...they're all flat characters...<<<

>>No they're not...<<

Do you know what flat character is? They all have a one track minds buddy. Yes, they are all flat characters. They dont change. They all have one over laying personality trait that remains consistant through out their cartoons.

jitterbug (and anyone else who likes popeye:http://seed-sower-sowing-seeds.blogspot.com/2006/06/now-thats-more-like-it.htmlAnd if anybody's interested in guessing the identities of various celebrities, head over to my caricatures posts. If no one guesses within a day i'm taking em down.

Yesterday I got a netflix of Aqua Teen Hunger Force. Which has horrible animation, but can be funny. And there was an episode called "The Clowning". And it was about a clown virus going around, and one of the things the virus did was cause a fleshy bow tie to appear on the victim!

Also, like Bill Watterson said: Good characters write themselves. You need to BE the character, not in some zen hippie way, but you jsut have to be familiar enough iht their personality to know how they';d react and play off ohter characters.

John, this is probably my favourite cartoon idea of yours so far so far. I'm no just kissing ass, this is better than He-Hog, The Heartaches, and George Liquor, im my opinion. I love Wally' impediments (I just like the word impediments) and I like Billy's evil. It's porbably the most golden age inspired idea of yuors so far, two charactrs in conflict, that can be in any time period. You know who Bill Melendez said Bob's carton are a carton of cartoon? Yours are like a cartoon of a cartoon of a cartoon. Yoor cartoons are like a parody of cartoon conventions, or rather, an exagerration of cartoons and even the Bob Clampett carttons you love get exagerrated. Instead of a lisp like Daffy, he has EVERY speech problem. He's named after his own species liek most cartoons, which makes him Wally MAN which points out how ridiculous and funny it is you name a cahracter "Mickey Mouse." Instead of being a naked animal with an arbitrary collar, tie and hat, he's a naked flesh bag and his clothes are actually a part of his skin! I love it! Wally sees to be so stupid as to be an extreme variation of the dimbulb characters of the 40's, like Elmer. Ok, that one may be wrong, since I don't know Wally in depth yet. But I "Get" it, I think, which is why I like this idea so much. Good luck!

Hum...I think Tom and Jerry have strong personalities. Jerry is a happy-go-lucky, smart-ass, kid-like (with some adult traits, like possibly being in love with sexy kittens in Cassanova Cat or Texas Tom) little rodent. Tom is more grumpy and dumb, but ocassionally he also can be a good fella.

The Wolf also has a personality for me, though it can be a little different depending of the cartoon. He's usually a rude guy, a MAN, and he likes what men likes, beautiful women, drinking and such. However he is sometimes more sophisticated (Red Hot Ridding Hood, Swingshift Cinderella) and sometimes more of the directly rude type (Shooting Of Dan McGoo). He has a totally different personality in Little Rural Riding Hood, though. Droopy also has one, but extremely simple. Mighty Mouse doesn't have personality in my opinion, but he has some appeal to him.

I don't know what to think about Wally Man, but at least it seems like a cartoon that could be surprising every week and that's something unusual in our tv networks.

I have to admit, when I first saw Wally Man in the earlier "Calling all kids!" post I overlooked him.

Maybe because I just didn't get it right away... Or because one of the stances he's in looks a little like a mildly angry naked George Liquor and thought "they'd never go for that nude angry guy for a kids show". Or maybe because I'm so used to seeing cutesy crap in all kids shows nowadays I had been brainwashed into rejecting something slightly beyond the "norm".

Yeah The Wolf doesnt have much a personality besides being a sort of stock lecherous figure designed as an excuse to make exaggerated takes at the girls, but visually he is designed well, but saying this I like Red Hot Riding Hood.Droopy is just a slow depressed hound,an underdog against the bully charcacter.That's one reason why Clampett's cartoons are better, because they concertrate on personality rather than gags.